The 119th Congress Flip-Flop Tracker: Who's Crossing Party Lines and Who Changed Their Vote

In the Senate, party loyalty is the political equivalent of gravity — powerful, constant, and nearly impossible to escape. Nearly. In the first three months of the 119th Congress's 2026 session, a handful of senators have defied that gravity repeatedly, voting against their party's position on some of the biggest bills of the year. Others have quietly shifted their voting behavior as the same legislation came back for repeated cloture votes. CVT's Flip-Flop Tracker maps who's crossing party lines, who changed their vote between rounds, and what two senators have in common beyond their complete disagreement on everything.

The Cross-Party Consistency Club: Fetterman and Paul

The 119th Congress has produced two senators who might be its defining crossover voters — one Democrat who keeps voting Republican, and one Republican who keeps voting Libertarian. Neither is a surprise. Both have earned the label through sheer consistency.

Sen. John Fetterman D-PA has been the most prolific Democratic crossover of the 2026 session. Across eight major contested votes, he crossed party lines six times — a 75% crossover rate on bills where his party had a clear majority position.

On Vote #38 (DHS cloture #1, Feb. 12), Fetterman voted YES with Republicans to advance the DHS funding bill — the only Democrat to do so. He did it again on Vote #54 (DHS cloture #4, March 12), and on the two cloture votes between them. Four separate DHS cloture votes. Four times Fetterman sided with Republicans against his caucus's position. On Vote #46 (Iran War Powers #1, March 4) and Vote #58 (Iran War Powers #2, March 18), Fetterman voted NO on both resolutions — the only Democrat to oppose the war powers measures his party supported 46-1.

His pattern is consistent: he supports law enforcement funding and opposes what he views as constraints on U.S. national security authority, even when those positions put him at odds with his caucus. He's not randomly breaking ranks — he's applying a coherent, if heterodox, framework.

Sen. Rand Paul R-KY mirrors Fetterman in structure if not direction. On Vote #46 and Vote #58, Paul voted YES on both Iran War Powers resolutions — the lone Republican both times to support a Democratic-led measure curtailing executive military authority. On Vote #53 (Housing Bill, March 12, 89-10), Paul voted NO — one of only nine Republicans to break from a bill that 80 of his colleagues supported. On Vote #59 (DHS cloture #5, March 20), he was not voting — consistent with his documented pattern of refusing to advance government funding without spending cuts.

Paul's framework is also coherent: any war requires congressional authorization regardless of which party occupies the White House; property rights and contract freedom override housing policy; spending without reform is unacceptable. Constitutional libertarianism as a voting guide produces cross-party results — and Paul has applied it consistently.

Strange Bedfellows: The Housing Bill NAY Coalition

H.R. 6644, the 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act, passed the Senate 89-10 — the most bipartisan vote of the year. But the ten NAY votes represent one of the most ideologically incoherent coalitions of the session: nine Republicans and one Democrat who agreed on absolutely nothing except opposition to this one bill.

The nine Republican NAYs — Cruz R-TX, Paul R-KY, Lee R-UT, Tillis R-NC, Scott R-FL, Johnson R-WI, Budd R-NC, Tuberville R-AL, and Young R-IN — objected to the bill's investor restriction provision, which requires large institutional investors to divest single-family home holdings over time. Their objection: government interference in private property markets and contract rights.

The sole Democratic NAY — Sen. Brian Schatz D-HI — objected to the exact same provision, but for the opposite reason: the investor restriction was drafted too broadly and would suppress rental housing construction, making Hawaii's housing shortage worse.

Two groups. Diametrically opposed ideologies. The same vote. This is the Flip-Flop Tracker's most elegant data point: when conservatives argue a provision goes too far and a progressive argues it doesn't go far enough, and both cast NAY — you've found a bill that drew bipartisan opposition while earning overwhelming bipartisan support. The 80 senators who voted YES included the most liberal and the most conservative members of the chamber. The 10 who voted no were united by nothing except disagreement.

Worth noting: Cruz, Scott, Young, Lee, and Johnson all voted YES on DHS cloture and YES on the SAVE Act — consistent with their party on partisan enforcement and election priorities. The housing NAY was their exception, not their pattern. Sen. Tillis is the wildcard: he voted NAY on housing and then did not vote on the SAVE Act, making him the only Republican with two defections in the same week.

The DHS Vote Drift: Same Bill, Different Attendance

The DHS cloture votes ran from February 12 through March 20 — five rounds on the same bill, the same procedural posture, and an outcome that never changed. The bill never got to 60. But the attendance patterns shifted.

On Vote #38 (Feb. 12), only one senator was not voting. By Vote #59 (March 20), 16 senators were absent. Among them: six who had voted YES on cloture in February but did not show up in March.

To be precise: this is not a true flip-flop — these senators didn't change their stated position. They simply stopped showing up. Vote #59 was held on a Friday afternoon, and the outcome was mathematically predetermined: even full Republican attendance wouldn't have reached 60. Some of these absences may reflect scheduling. None of these senators offered public explanations.

The accountability question stands regardless: if you voted YES on cloture in February, what changed in five weeks? The bill is the same. The Democratic opposition is the same. The DHS is still partially shut down. The only thing that's changed is the political calculus — the vote on March 20 was a losing fight, and several Republican senators appear to have quietly disengaged from it.

The Anti-Flip-Flop: Iran War Powers Consistency

Not every story in the Flip-Flop Tracker is about changing votes. The Iran War Powers resolutions tell the opposite story — a case study in what total conviction looks like.

S.J.Res. 104 (March 4, Vote #46, 47-53) and S.J.Res. 118 (March 18, Vote #58, 47-53) produced identical results — identical vote totals, identical crossovers, identical lineup. Not a single senator changed their vote between March 4 and March 18 on a war vote.

Rand Paul R-KY voted YES both times — consistent with his constitutional position that Congress must authorize military force, regardless of party. John Fetterman D-PA voted NO both times — consistent with his view that the U.S. military response to Iran's nuclear program was justified. Every other senator held their position exactly. When the war is live and the vote is on the record, nobody blinked.

In a Senate session defined by procedural maneuvering, attendance drift, and occasional strategic positioning, zero vote-changes on a war resolution represents something rare: a chamber operating on genuine conviction rather than political calculation.

House Side: 20 Democrats Cross on Immigration

The crossover pattern isn't confined to the Senate. On March 18, the House passed the Deporting Fraudsters Act (H.R. 1958) by 231-186 (Roll Call #94). Twenty House Democrats voted with Republicans to advance an immigration enforcement bill — the most bipartisan immigration vote in months.

The House-Senate divergence is striking: in the Senate, every Democrat except Fetterman has voted against advancing the DHS funding bill for five rounds. In the House, 20 Democrats in competitive districts crossed on a deportation bill. The intra-party split on immigration enforcement operates differently at both ends of the Capitol — senators from safely blue states holding firm, House members in tighter districts making different political calculations.

What to Watch

The 119th Congress 2026 session is still running, and the crossover patterns are unlikely to stabilize. A few things CVT will track going forward:

Fetterman and DHS: If a deal is struck on DHS funding before the next recess, does Fetterman vote with his party on final passage — or does he continue to be the only Democratic crossover? His DHS voting pattern is the most sustained Democratic defection in recent memory.

Paul and a third Iran WPR: If Sen. Booker or Sen. Kaine brings a third Iran War Powers resolution, does Paul vote YES a third time? He has so far. The Senate procedural track record suggests another attempt is coming.

The YEA-to-NV senators on DHS: If a cloture vote reaches 58 or 59 and needs exactly one more vote, do Britt, Daines, Fischer, Sheehy, Tuberville, or Wicker show up? That's the moment their February attendance becomes consequential.

CVT will update cross-party voting records through the end of the 119th Congress 2026 session. Every crossover is tracked. Every Not Voting is noted. All data links to official Senate roll call records.